2013 Miller.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by‐nc‐sa/2.5/ca/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the same
or similar license to this one.

Abstract

Objective – To
discover the factors that influence digital information preservation practices
and attitudes of adult public library users.

Setting – Urban
public library on the East Coast of the United States.

Subjects – 26 adult
members of a public library’s Friends group.

Methods – The
researcher conducted semi-structured interviews with 26 participants. All
participants drew maps to indicate the types of information they value and why,
and their preferences for information storage and maintenance. Qualitative data
were supplemented by a matrix questionnaire on which 22 participants identified
the types of digital information they maintain, and modes of storage.

Main Results – Some
public library users may store and organize information inconsistently,
utilizing a variety of digital devices. Technical, social, and emotional
context influences choices about organization, sharing of information, and
short- and long-term preservation. Users reported placing a higher value on
born digital information, and information that they had shared with others.

Conclusion – Public
librarians may have a role in facilitating growth of patron knowledge about
creation, storage, preservation, and sharing of personal digital information.

Commentary

While corporate and academic libraries have investigated the long-term
storage and preservation of their patron and institutional data, the author
makes a compelling case that we know less about the everyday digital
information preservation practices of individual public library users.

Designed to validate a qualitative inquiry, the author’s methodology
offers a time-intensive model for inquiry about information use and
preservation. The author carefully explains strategies employed to validate the
results. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed with NVivo 7.0. To ensure coding consistency, two independent
judges evaluated the coding of a sample of the interview transcripts. The researcher
used an instrument developed by Savolainen and Kari
(2004) to evaluate the maps drawn by each participant.

The author outlines three questions about public library users and the
characteristics of the digital information they maintain, their motives, and
the factors that influence their choice to preserve digital information. All
participants reported storing digital photographs, email, music, and word
processed documents using a variety of tools, with varying degrees of technical
problems and challenges. While the author suggests that public libraries could
become more involved in patrons’ private computing, studying participants who
own a computer curtails the library practitioner’s ability to apply findings
about participant behaviour to public library users
in general.

The study’s most notable finding is that users most valued digital
information they had shared with others, and information sharing was influenced
by the emotional connection represented by the file. Emotional attachments to
information strongly influenced participants’ rationale for preserving files
for the long-term, and the social and emotional context of information creation
influenced choices about organization, naming conventions, and sharing.

The validity of this research is limited by the characteristics and size
of the participant pool. The author offers no justification for recruiting
volunteers from the Friends of the Library, a decision which yielded an
unrepresentative sample of public library users in general. In addition, this
research does not explore how often or how participants used the library, or
whether subjects desired library instruction about digital information
preservation. In light of these factors, the author cannot generalize about
public library users’ “everyday life” modes of digital information creation or
storage, common motives for preserving information, or how public librarians
might intervene to enhance users’ skills and expertise.

Librarians might hope that the outcome of this research would inform the
development of group, individual, or point-of-need instruction. The author
suggests that public library patrons may benefit from instruction or
consultation about methods of prioritizing, storing, and organizing digital
files. However, this research would be more useful to practitioners if it
offered evidence that the diverse population of public library users needs and
desires library instruction and services about digital information management.